Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> @@ -137,18 +137,20 @@ static int aqm_open(struct inode *inode, struct
>> file *file)
>> len += scnprintf(info->buf + len,
>> info->size - len,
>> "* vif\n"
>> - "ifname addr ac backlog-bytes backlog-
>> packets flows overlimit collisions tx-bytes tx-packets\n");
>> + "ifname addr ac backlog-bytes backlog-
>> packets flows drops marks overlimit collisions tx-bytes tx-
>> packets\n");
>
> It seems to me that you have to change the buffer length to take this
> into account?
Haven't run into issues with running out of buffer space in my testing.
But yeah, guess that could become an issue.
>> list_for_each_entry_rcu(sdata, &local->interfaces, list) {
>> txqi = to_txq_info(sdata->vif.txq);
>> len += scnprintf(info->buf + len, info->size - len,
>> - "%s %pM %u %u %u %u %u %u %u %u\n",
>> + "%s %pM %u %u %u %u %u %u %u %u %u
>> %u\n",
>> sdata->name,
>
> Why is it this way anyway? It'd seem nicer to move the content of this
> into the per-netdev subdirectories, and then it becomes a lot simpler
> code too (yes, at the expense of some userspace, but still)
Yeah, makes sense. Can do a larger reorg moving things into the
per-netdev and per-station directories instead.
>> txqi->txq.ac,
>> txqi->tin.backlog_bytes,
>> txqi->tin.backlog_packets,
>> txqi->tin.flows,
>> + txqi->cstats.drop_count,
>> + txqi->cstats.ecn_mark,
>> txqi->tin.overlimit,
>> txqi->tin.collisions,
>> txqi->tin.tx_bytes,
>
> Do you really want to add these in the middle? Seems that if you add
> them at the end, you at least have *some* way of keeping this working
> with older versions?
Well I though they should be logically grouped with overlimits, and was
counting on no one actually parsing these yet. Guess if the information
is moved that becomes moot.
Will re-send; thanks for the feedback :)
-Toke
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
